• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj


  • Subject: Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj
  • From: Greg Hurrell <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:25:55 +0200

El 24/06/2005, a las 7:17, Brian Krent escribió:

OTOH, the user experience with names like English.lproj is better. Just use Get Info in Finder to look at some Apple application's languages list (or modify it) - it's a real mess of unintelligible two-letter codes.


I agree. The abbreviation/"letter-codes" are ugly to look at. It's unnatural and disgusts me. At the very least, end users should never have to see it. But I'd rather not have the .lproj bundles named with the abbreviations either. It may be a standard, but it's not a very good standard for a humane operating environment.

I don't agree with either of these posts because they come from an English-centric perspective. I think developers should be using the ISO abbreviations (as Apple has been telling them to do for a long, long time now) and that the Finder should display localized, human- readable versions of them in the "Get Info" window.


How is it that the user experience for a Spanish user, for example, is better when the languages are shown as "English", "Spanish" etc instead of "Inglés", "Español" and so forth? You said that abbreviations are "unnatural", "disgusting" and not "humane" (fairly strong words, perhaps you need to calm down) but I suspect that you only think so because you speak English... Everybody else in the world who doesn't speak English probably finds the use of unabbreviated English language names equally unfriendly and almost as unintelligible.

I don't know if Apple provides an API for moving back and forth between the ISO codes and localized human-readable representations of those codes (needless to say I think it should), but I do know that at the very least Apple's own software (specifically the Finder) should be displaying things in the user's own language, whatever that may be. They do it in the "International" preference pane, so I know they're capable of it! It's 2005 and there's really no excuse for not being fully localized.

Greg _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj
      • From: Brian Krent <email@hidden>
    • Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj
      • From: "Alexey Proskuryakov" <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj (From: João Varela <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj (From: Scott Tooker <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj (From: "Alexey Proskuryakov" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj (From: Brian Krent <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj
  • Next by Date: dlopen woes under XCode 2.1
  • Previous by thread: Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj
  • Next by thread: Re: Using XCode and en.lproj vs. English.lproj
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread